PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
1.52 - 1.58
1.19 - 3.37
354.5K / 984.1K (Avg.)
-1.64 | -0.94
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
2.81%
Positive revenue growth while FSLR is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
153.84%
Gross profit growth above 1.5x FSLR's 13.61%. David Dodd would confirm if the company's business model is superior in terms of production costs or pricing.
29.81%
EBIT growth 1.25-1.5x FSLR's 25.36%. Bruce Berkowitz would verify if strategic initiatives are driving this edge.
33.02%
Operating income growth 1.25-1.5x FSLR's 25.36%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if strategic measures (e.g., cost cutting, product mix) are succeeding.
33.08%
Net income growth above 1.5x FSLR's 3.92%. David Dodd would check if a unique moat or cost structure secures superior bottom-line gains.
34.04%
EPS growth above 1.5x FSLR's 3.09%. David Dodd would review if superior product economics or effective buybacks drive the outperformance.
33.33%
Diluted EPS growth above 1.5x FSLR's 3.75%. David Dodd would see if there's a robust moat protecting these shareholder gains.
1.01%
Share count expansion well above FSLR's 0.45%. Michael Burry would question if management is raising capital unnecessarily or is over-incentivizing employees with stock.
0.40%
Diluted share count expanding well above FSLR's 0.44%. Michael Burry would fear significant dilution to existing owners' stakes.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-24.60%
Both companies show negative OCF growth. Martin Whitman would analyze broader economic or industry conditions limiting cash flow.
-3.56%
Both companies show negative FCF growth. Martin Whitman would consider an industry-wide capital spending surge or margin compression.
308.66%
10Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of FSLR's 1532.84%. Michael Burry would suspect a lasting competitive disadvantage.
-40.06%
Negative 5Y CAGR while FSLR stands at 25.29%. Joel Greenblatt would push for a turnaround plan or reevaluation of the company’s product line.
-47.51%
Both firms have negative 3Y CAGR. Martin Whitman would wonder if the entire market segment is in short-term retreat.
-2385.62%
Negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR while FSLR stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would scrutinize managerial effectiveness and product competitiveness.
-48.88%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while FSLR is at 196.55%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
-292.11%
Both face negative short-term OCF/share growth. Martin Whitman would suspect macro or cyclical issues hitting them both.
-15021.96%
Negative 10Y net income/share CAGR while FSLR is at 6743.73%. Joel Greenblatt sees a major red flag in long-term profit erosion.
-2730.84%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while FSLR is 23.21%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-35.33%
Negative 3Y CAGR while FSLR is 146.93%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
132.63%
Equity/share CAGR of 132.63% while FSLR is zero. Bruce Berkowitz might see a slight advantage that can compound significantly over 10 years.
-41.36%
Negative 5Y equity/share growth while FSLR is at 34.82%. Joel Greenblatt sees the competitor building net worth while this firm loses ground.
25.43%
3Y equity/share CAGR at 75-90% of FSLR's 33.74%. Bill Ackman pushes for margin or operational changes to match the competitor’s pace.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
1.74%
Our AR growth while FSLR is cutting. John Neff questions if the competitor outperforms in collections or if we’re pushing credit to maintain sales.
1.15%
Inventory shrinking or stable vs. FSLR's 15.79%. David Dodd confirms the company’s supply-chain is more efficient if sales are unaffected.
-0.46%
Negative asset growth while FSLR invests at 3.57%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-2.33%
We have a declining book value while FSLR shows 2.97%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
3.89%
Debt growth far above FSLR's 3.43%. Michael Burry fears the firm is taking on undue leverage vs. the competitor.
1.06%
We increase R&D while FSLR cuts. John Neff sees a short-term profit drag but a potential lead in future innovations.
-7.43%
We cut SG&A while FSLR invests at 7.34%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.